what if instead of some distant land this guy was blown up by a predator while driving in Montana or Texas somewhere? Would you all feel the same? We have plenty of terrorist here in America what if Timothy Mcveigh was just blown up as he drove down the road? Would that have been ok? Now lets take it to the extreme, how about we arm all those police helicopters with hellfires and end these car chases before they ever happen..........

Al-Awlaki was a U.S.-born Islamic militant cleric who became a prominent figure with Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the network's most active branch. He was involved in several terror plots in the United States in recent years, using his fluent English and Internet savvy to draw recruits to carry out attacks. President Obama signed an order in early 2010 making him the first American to be placed on the "kill or capture" list. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/09/30/us-born-terror-boss-anwar-al-awlaki-killed/#ixzz1cBMrLt9c

Iddee did you not say "Wanted Dead or Alive"Its back the wording has changed

Well reading in this post you guys make my jaw drop. Not defending the guy but the government has no right to just kill a US citizen under any circumstances. As Kathy says the constitution is the law of the land it is the law on which all other laws are measured against. For those of you who say Obamacare is unconstitutional if you feel that assassinating a citizen is okay you shouldn't have any problem with Obamacare. As for revoking citizenship do you know how hard it is to get out of being a US citizen? You can't renounce your citizenship and bam your no longer a citizen. If I remember correctly looking into this it takes ten years for one to fully be rid of his or her US citizenship after it is renounced. Why you may ask? Because in the past rich folks who didn't like being taxed to death were leaving and taking their money with them. So congress couldn't have that so they made it to where you can renounce become a citizen of another country and still have to pay taxes for ten years. It seems like more and more we are going back to the days of the Roman Empire where even the emperor wasn't exempt from assassination. So be good cause don't want to accidentally end up on a list being a suspected terrorist cause your gonna die.

it was legal before that. that's why so many of us shook our heads at clintons taking a pass on killing UBL when he had the chance.

so it's ok for the us government to execute, without due process, a US citizen that they designate a terrorist? just want to make sure i understand your position.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called the government. They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

BTW… YES the government does have the right to kill terrorists….GW BUSH made it LEGAL with laws passed after 911.

Thats right just like when bluebee killed 169 innocent people fire up the drone lock and load. What's that you say? you aren't a terrorist I guess we will never know will we. America has laws for a reason. We don't ignore them even when it is for "a greater good"

wouldn't matter who did this. i would feel the same. as it happens, he seems not to care much about law, so i guess it fits that he's the one who did it.

Quote

And Yes, it is FINE for the government to take out terrorists like McVeigh without due process when there are laws superseding that.

what laws superseded the constitution?

Quote

And Yes, terrorists should be taken out for the greater good.

yes they should....if they are foreign terrorists and not covered by the US constitution.

Quote

We are still in the war on terrorism in case anyone fell asleep

that's probably something that keith and i know better than most. our oath, and the oath of our family members is to protect and defend the constitution of the united states.you may feel that this is a silly argument. i think that's sad cometary on those who believe as you do.

how'd you feel about Waco and Ruby Ridge?

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called the government. They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

This isn't Waco or Ruby Ridge. We are at war with terrorist. When you're at war, your troops aren't required to develop probably cause to make an arrest or submit the case to the DA's office for an indictment. Our troops are trained to kill the enemy. If this would have happened under Bush, you wouldn't have given it a second thought. Our President killed Bin Laden and he killed a traitor who was desperately trying to kill his own countrymen in a WAR we are fighting. Wake up!

If this would have happened under Bush, you wouldn't have given it a second thought. Our President killed Bin Laden and he killed a traitor who was desperately trying to kill his own countrymen in a WAR we are fighting. Wake up!

i absolutely would have. and in case you have forgotten, UBL was not a citizen. it is the execution without due process and immediate threat, that we are talking about. a man with no charges brought against him by our government.

the same consideration would not have been made for bush. as i recall he was either Hitler, the intentional killer of babies, the devil.....if he had ignored the constitution and killed a US citizen, no matter the good intentions, there would have been an explosion from the loony left.

we are not talking politics here.

can you tell me the difference between Waco, Ruby Ridge, and this?

all right, well....this gives me a new perspective on the state of the american mind. kind of a sad one. it's always good to know how people think...or don't.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called the government. They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

-we have a constitution and it is the law of the land.-that constitution guarantees certain rights and protections for citizens....not just good citizens.-presidents have ignored the constitution before, Lincoln for instance, but i don't think this can be compared to something like the Emaciation Proclamation.

-this guy was a bad guy and needed to be dead.-if the government had enough to go after him, why no warrant, indictment, revocation of citizenship, etc?-why the public declaration that we were going to kill him, then public credit for doing so? -are we now to accept that it is ok for the president to publicly ignore the constitution and do as he pleases by decree?-do we now accept that the president holds the power to execute, without due process, American citizens?

-how was this decision made?-what constitutes a citizen enemy?-who was involved in this decision?

see, i don't care about this guy. glad he's gone. i do care about the precedent set by this action. i care that we can't see the future, so we can't know how this will be used again, either by this president or another. our laws either mean something or they don't. maybe we should be thinking about that?

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called the government. They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

I find it amusing or maybe just sad under Bush enemy combatants were arrested on the battlefield and the loony left wanted to mirandize them and try them in American courts. Now under obama an American is killed on the battle field by American forces without batting an eye by the left. Yes he was a terrorist but he was an American. i guess i always thought that superceded things, ya know the whole innocent until proven guilty in a court of law thinggy. I just don't get the left, how they like to take a dump on the Constitution when dealing with our own but use the same constitution to try to aid foreign fighters.

keith, it's not the left on here that's bothering me. you'd expect them to support what their president does. that's ok. it's those who claim to be conservatives and are applauding this that i find very discouraging.

i think you and i and those with a similar background have a little different perspective....i guess....

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called the government. They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

The president has the power to pardon, does he have the opposite power, when it comes to national security.

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just saying there are ways he could have done it legally. Whether he took those steps or not, I don't know. I don't think any of us do.

Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

Does anyone see the similarity between what is happening today and the rise of the 3rd Reich? The German people put trust in their government and we had the rise of Adolf Hitler. Guys it only takes one wack job coming to power to take what little freedom we have left and trump up crimes against innocent people that oppose them. We stop questioning and start applauding what one does that is wrong just because they are a terrorist and you fall into the same mindset as the German people pre WWII.

this might be one of the VERY FEW times i'd agree with the ACLU. i think this president set a very dangerous precedent when he started executing citizens...no matter who or where they are.

since i have been identified as a potential domestic terrorist (so have you, keith) i have a special interest in seeing this stopped. that's way to much power in the hands of one man, no matter who he is.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called the government. They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

... Tell that to the weavers. They tracked and harassed them for months, then activated an action to get it over with. Seeing his dog... shot to death by masked intruders... Sammy Weaver, 14, fired back in fear for his life. The 4 ft., 11" tall youngster was... shot in the back as he turned to run for home.... killed by an agent of the federal government.

Cradling her 10-month-old daughter in her arms, Vicki Weaver stood in the doorway of her home... unaware that she herself had only seconds to live. In an instant a bullet tore into Vicki Weaver's face, blew through her jaw and severed her carotid artery. The bullet was fired from 200 yds. away by an agent of the federal government...

The thing that queered the government's case against Randy Weaver was not the Fast and Furious Erick Holder style frame up of Randy Weaver endured. What ripped it was Weaver's lawyer who on cross examination got the FBI sniper, Lon Horiuchi, to admit in open court that he enjoyed killing Vicky Weaver. Chilling, very chilling.

No again. Our community organizer is not the sort to personally get his hands dirty. He simply authorized the execution of a citizen without due process. A bad citizen, whom we are undoubtedly better off without. But the larger issue is that this was the action of a king or a dictator who considers himself above the constitution he took an oath to defend.